If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 10 February 2013 - 06:24 PM

Uncle Sam, on 09 February 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

He should be campaigning for strict gun safety training within the police force, instead of being a ****** *** and try to take away our right to bare arms.

just a question? Why should you have to campaign for this when the janitors are being asked to do this with out campaigns? Seems odd that the police are not already being given strict gun safety training......but can not see how this will stop the police officer who decides to take the law into his own hands and shoots innocent people, it will help him shoot even better, but it will not change his warped mind.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

Congressmen Jim Langevin (D-RI) and David N. Cicilline (D-RI) today joined Chair Mike Thompson (CA-05) in releasing the House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force’s comprehensive policy principles designed to reduce gun violence while respecting Second Amendment Rights of law-abiding Americans.
“We must seize this opportunity to do all we can to prevent future tragedies,” said Langevin. “The vast majority of Americans want to see meaningful reforms to our gun laws to keep weapons out of the wrong hands, and we have a moral obligation to follow through on actions that would make our communities safer, especially our children. Following the Task Force’s principles would set us on the path to fulfilling that responsibility, while respecting the Second Amendment.”

It's a nice release off Langevins government page. Violence Prevention Task Force- gives a description of a bunch of folks they talked to, and a bulletpoint of what the VPTF is urging congress to do...

Three of the bulletpoints..

Quote

Support the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans. The United States Supreme Court affirmed individuals’ Second Amendment rights to firearms in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). However, the Supreme Court also held that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” Within the limits described by Heller, the federal government has the responsibility to take appropriate steps to protect our citizens from gun violence.

Supportcitizens’ rights to possess firearms for hunting, shooting sports, defense, and other lawful and legitimate purposes: In the United States, there is a long tradition of hunting and recreational shooting, and firearms are often passed down within families from generation to generation. Policies passed by Congress should respect this.

Support responsible gun ownership: Congress should support safety training, research aimed at developing new gun safety technologies and the safe storage of firearms.

There's a lot of other stuff too about some gun control, cracking down on illegal guns, addressing mental health issues, background checks, general safety and prevention stuff...
I have to agree with some of the things the VPTF is urging. Some points I have mixed feelings about.

I respectfully disagree with this statement when the average patrol officer who works maybe 1hr out of his 12 hr shift the rest is sitting in the car and talking bs with his partners as underpaid. They can often make over 100k a year with overtime. There overtime comes from securing the scene for other detective types that need the patrol cops to hang around hours beyond there shifts and just stand around. Not exactly overworked.

I will agree elements of there job can be high risk but those are very quick and end quickly episodes.

That may be the case in some areas, but not all. I would have to see proof they can make over 100k with overtime...it definitely isn't true in my area. I guess you could say a lot of people have jobs just standing around, from the local librarian to the union road worker who stands next to the road directing traffic around construction. Most of the time they stand around doing nothing...waiting to be needed, but they are still on the job.

Should they be paid according to the risk factor? If that is the case then a lot of them should be making a bunch more money.

If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:16 PM

Michelle, on 11 February 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

That may be the case in some areas, but not all. I would have to see proof they can make over 100k with overtime...it definitely isn't true in my area. I guess you could say a lot of people have jobs just standing around, from the local librarian to the union road worker who stands next to the road directing traffic around construction. Most of the time they stand around doing nothing...waiting to be needed, but they are still on the job.

Should they be paid according to the risk factor? If that is the case then a lot of them should be making a bunch more money.

Maybe there is no need for overtime in your area, I think thats a good thing, shows they are not overstretched because of too much crime.
But, yes, they should get paid according to risk factor, and in areas where gun crime and gang crimes are rife, they probably do.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.